User talk:JakePT/Archive1
Hi, welcome to Mass Effect Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Mordin page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- SpartHawg948 (Talk) 08:52, November 13, 2009 Lots o' Edits Sorry for so damn many edits, but I'm always forgetting to preview or remembering something just as I confirm so I often go back and tweak tiny things. ;D JakePT 09:16, November 20, 2009 (UTC) :No worries, I often do the same thing. On a related note, keep up the good work! Everything you're doing looks great! I'm especially fond of the Collectors page now. Love that image! SpartHawg948 09:38, November 20, 2009 (UTC) Unfortunately, this practice has some flaws, such as your complete removal of the "decisions that affect ME2's gameplay" section of Mass Effect 2, which to many users is a surprise. H-Man Havoc 22:50, January 19, 2010 (UTC) :I'd hardly call the removal of the info in question a "flaw", as for my reasoning why this removal was appropriate, you can see it either below in the appropriate section (not just tacked onto a two-month old thread about another topic) or over at the Talk:Mass Effect 2 page. Needless to say, I agree 100% with JakePT's editing of the ME2 article. SpartHawg948 23:02, January 19, 2010 (UTC) Categorising Could you do me a really big favour and categorise the images you've uploaded? I try to stay away from ME2 images due to spoilers, but they still need to be categorised. Just click on the image and hit the "add categories" button at the bottom. --Tullis 15:52, November 20, 2009 (UTC) :Ah, yes, sorry about that oversight. Is there a way to view all images I uploaded? Or will I have to scour through my contributions? JakePT 01:37, November 21, 2009 (UTC) ::You should have a tab that says contributions.--Xaero Dumort 12:14, November 21, 2009 (UTC) :::Yeah I saw that, I was hoping there was a list of just images I'd uploaded though, so I didn't have to go through all my text contributions, and possible miss some images. JakePT 13:52, November 21, 2009 (UTC) :::Ok, Done categorising all of them, I think. JakePT 14:12, November 21, 2009 (UTC) Images 1) Please check with us before doing wholesale edits to the race pages. The images you added were enormous and messed up the page formatting. The quarian image you added was especially huge. We have just done a pass to create the top-of-article images -- including taking new ones for humans and quarians -- to keep a consistent look throughout the wiki. You may prefer larger images, but images so big they make the page look weird need to go. 2) Please DON'T upload images that are just named "turian.png" or "batarian.png". It makes the images very difficult to find if you need them and makes it extremely likely that someone else uploading, say, another turian image, will overwrite it, which creates other problems. The longer and more descriptive a filename has, the easier it is to find. 3) Re: your edit to humans: we don't use images of Shepard, even the default Shepard, on the wiki. See canon for more details. Thanks. --Tullis 14:19, November 23, 2009 (UTC) :Ok fair enough, but: :1) After putting them in they didn't 'mess up' any formatting at any resolution I checked at. I proceeded with doing more pages largely because there weren't any issues and the picutres looked better and the only comment I got from doing the Collectors a few days ago was "I'm especially fond of the Collectors page now." from SpartHawg948. :2) My bad. :3) I understand that, my thinking was just that since he was left unidentified it was just 'generic human' as opposed to actually being any character in the game it was appropriate for the human page. :JakePT 23:26, November 23, 2009 (UTC) ::1) I haven't seen the Collectors' page (spoiler dodging) so it may look totally awesome. Therefore, I apologize if I'm tarring all your edits with the same self-righteous-Tullis brush. : ) ::2) In retrospect that was kind of rude of me. You didn't know. It's just something to bear in mind from a technical POV. If you want to keep those images here, could you move 'em to a new filename? ::3) A noble idea, but trouble is, that's obviously the default male Shepard. He's too easily identifiable around here to be a generic human. We usually stick to Kaidan and Ash to be our "poster humans". --Tullis 23:37, November 23, 2009 (UTC) :::To throw in my two cents about the third point- when I saw it for some reason the Shepard thing didn't really click, but what did come to mind was that (and this is, of course, just my opinion) I HATE that picture. The original one w/ Ashley and Kaidan looks much better and seems more appropriate in that it shows both a male and a female of the species, as well as being a shot that shows more of the physical characteristics, and not just the face. SpartHawg948 23:40, November 23, 2009 (UTC) Ok, a couple of things. First of all I really jumped the gun on this, don't know why I did it without any kind of discussion first, I guess I just got ahead of myself. Apologies for that. However, I do still think the existing images are really lacking in many ways. They're very small (they don't have to be as big as I made them (that would be nice though), but they're too small at the moment for the main image on a page IMO), many are out of date (Krogan and Volus are from a while before the game was even released), they lack detail, they're pretty much all just headshots (some of mine had that issue too) so you wouldn't have any idea quarians or turians had bird-like legs, the geth image is a mess, you can't make anything out and I'm pretty sure it's out of date. Case in point, my Husk image, even if you disagree with the size I had it at, you have to agree it's much more detailed and gave a much better idea if what a Husk actually is. On a smaller note, the main reason I chose the Shepard pic was because it was the only human image I could find that was detailed/large enough for what I was doing, which isn't so much of an issue if that's not what you guys want to be doing, but it's why I chose it at the time. The vast majority of Mass Effect images are low resolution, not very detailed and are older versions of the games designs from before release. Anyway, I would still like the wiki to strongly consider larger, more detailed and up to date images for races. JakePT 04:34, November 24, 2009 (UTC) :I made a temporary Race template and used in on the Asari page before quickly reverting: :http://masseffect.wikia.com/index.php?title=Asari&oldid=44391 :I figured putting it in the past was the best way to keep it out of the way. Anyway, I think something like that would be better than what we have. Comments? :JakePT 05:13, November 24, 2009 (UTC) ::Actually, we only use infoboxes for important individual characters. Just having two sets of information in an infobox isn't particularly handy, and not all fields in an infobox like that would apply to all races; we've tried them before. But thank you for the effort. However, rather than editing and reverting, test pages should be created in the sandbox. ::We do have newer shots for the quarian and human pages, but I actually like using the old Codex images. The volus and krogan ones aren't out of date; they still look like a volus and a krogan, after all. Maybe the geth one needs swapping out to the other Codex pic, but I don't see the point of showing that quarians and turians have "bird like legs". Is that really important? Besides, if the image is so huge you actually have to scroll the page a little to see all of it, and it messes up the page formatting, that doesn't really make things better. ::The shots are there to illustrate the top of the page and the top paragraph, and help people identify what race they're looking at. If they were the only images on the pages, I would understand your concerns, but all the race pages have multiple images showing individuals from different angles. And they aren't actually that small. They're at 250px, which is large for a square image. Are you honestly telling me that the image for batarians is too small? How much bigger do you want it to be, exactly? ::Another issue is consistency and display. The images you've been putting on the race pages have all been at different sizes and aspect ratios. Keeping a consistent look across the race pages shows we've put thought and care into how the pages look, rather than just throwing images at them to see what sticks. : ) In addition, if you make the images too large, it can create problems in other browsers or if the wiki is being viewed on, say, an iPhone; we had problems a while back with the characters page, where the arrangement of the images were actually pushing off the edge of the page in some browsers, so we had to fix it. ::Finally: when you say "the vast majority of Mass Effect images are low resolution, not very detailed and are older versions of the games designs from before release", I'm not sure what you're referring to. A lot of officially released screenshots are, yes, but if you're referring to the wiki, we actually have hundreds of extremely good screenshots. Check Screenshots, Category:Screenshots or to see them. --Tullis 13:53, November 24, 2009 (UTC) :::Thanks for the sandbox advice, I suspected something like that existed, but didn't no exactly where so I tried to do the next least intrusive thing I could think of. :::I'm curious what resolution you're running at, or what the majority of users are running at, because none of the issues you describe occurred from my POV when I did those edits, even after shrinking my browser window. (I'm at 1440x900) :::Also, the race image where all exactly the same size, unless something odd happened during the upload. I know this for a fact since I started with one image and pasted new ones into it and Saved As. :::Good point on the screenshots thing, It didn't occur to me that there might be plenty of unofficial screenshots here. :::I think we're running into issues of taste here. I just think the wiki would be a more pleasant place to visit if there were larger more detailed images with consistent quality (compare Geth to Volus, to Human, to Salarian, to Krogan), they're all the same size, sure, but some of them are more detailed than others, some are rendered differently to others etc. What I'd prefer to see, and what I think users would prefer to see, is something that more closely resembles something like a magazine or something more media rich, or even just the pages of a real encyclopedia, which, depending on what kind, would have large detailed images. Obviously there's an issue of balance between the right size, not messing up the layout and catering to users using different display resolutions, but I think it's something worth undertaking. :::PS: My images had no issues on the iPhone: :::http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v637/NeoRicen/IMG_0143.png :::In fact, I'd argue quite strongly that it works much better that way on the iPhone since the image is clear and detailed while at default zoom, and the text is legible at the same time, you don't need to zoom in on the image to make it out :::JakePT 04:54, November 25, 2009 (UTC) Moving pages Kindly don't, not without asking us or discussing it first. Even admins don't generally move important looking pages without discussion on the talk page. Just putting a note in the summary is not enough. --Tullis 15:25, December 6, 2009 (UTC) Consensus Actually, this leads on from what I said above. I would have emailed this to you, but regrettably I don't have your email address. Firstly: thank you for your edits to ME2 pages. Both SpartHawg and I appreciate your work keeping these tidy and free of speculation. I also appreciate the housekeeping on the Mass Effect 2 page proper, since I can't do big overhauls 'til the game comes out. : ) However, your movement of the SR-2 page was indicative of a larger pattern. This is a wiki, which is a collaborative project in which everyone works together, shares ideas and fixes stuff as a group. Enthusiasm I can respect, but you seem very determined to organise things your way, to your personal preferences, regardless of what SH or I have discussed. The issue with the races pages was a case in point, as was your request -- which I viewed with some incredulity -- about moving the quotes on pages very slightly, simply because you'd prefer it that way. We -- i.e. the community -- have developed the look and feel of the wiki over more than two years of working on it, and while I appreciate your contributions, I would also appreciate seeing more discussion from you before you decide to make changes like overhauling articles or moving pages. I'm finding it very stressful to try and keep track of what you're doing out there because you have a tendency to make big overarching changes without talking about it; I'm never quite sure what I'm going to find! : ) The gist of this is: please talk to us if you're planning to make major changes, and occasionally be understanding if we want to do stuff a particular way. --Tullis 16:27, December 6, 2009 (UTC) :Thanks for the message, I have been easing up on that recently I hope, I am trying to control myself :). :I do want to defend my decision on the Normandy move however. I did it because from where I was standing it was plainly obvious at this time that the ship's designation as SSV was completely speculation, and I know you guys do have a problem with that. In fact I was surprised it hadn't been done earlier. While the - in SR-2 misunderstanding was my fault, the removal of SSV was about as obvious as you could get on this wiki. It would be the equivalent of naming the Jacob Taylor article Jacob Bob Taylor. Sure, it might be true, but it's, as far as we know, just speculation, and as of right now, not his name. JakePT 00:13, December 7, 2009 (UTC) ::I think you are missing the crux of the issue here though. As Tullis said, the SR-2 thing was just one piece of a bigger issue. You can't be making major changes like this unilaterally. Even the admins don't do that. If you want to make major changes like moving pages, you need to bring it up first on the talk page. This is part of the process that has helped this wiki run very smoothly for over two years now. So please, don't just take it upon yourself to make these sorts of decisions unilaterally. SpartHawg948 00:46, December 7, 2009 (UTC) ::Also, please refer to the current discussion over at SSV Normandy SR-2. As another user's comment reminded me, SR- is an Alliance designation, their version of a Hull Classification Symbol or Pennant Number, a fact confirmed by one of the writers of Mass Effect. So, wouldn't the fact that the SR-2 Normandy possesses one of these designators pretty much confirm it's status as an Alliance vessel, therefor validating the SSV? SpartHawg948 05:30, December 7, 2009 (UTC) My apologies. I made a snap judgment when writing earlier, and in changing the edits you made, I changed it back and apologize there, but I wanted to apologize here as well. I would like to ask, what makes you say the trailer is not made in house? Often those sorts of things are outsourced, but usually given pertinent information in their creation process.--Xaero Dumort 04:19, December 13, 2009 (UTC) :No harm done. :Anyway, the trailer is done by Blur, a company that does this sort of thing, as originally reported when the trailer was announced http://meforums.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=711849&forum=144&sp=105. :http://www.blur.com/ :Obviously they are given important information that they need to use, but as you can see in their Dragon Age trailer they don't necessarily match up to the game 100% (if you haven't played Dragon Age, the characters Morrigan and Sten look very different in game than they do in the trailer). Grunt may very well be on Tuchunka, but the Cinematic Trailer doesn't come anywhere close to saying that, it simply says Shepard has gone to Tuchunka and shows footage of Grunt fighting. I'm not sure Grunt is necessarily recruited on Omega, but the evidence linking him to Omega is the same as the evidence linking him to Tuchunka and there's no reason at this stage to prioritise one over the other. :If I had my way the Grunt article simply wouldn't mention his location yet. As for Mordin we know there are two missions to meet salarians, assuming the snippets of text on the old ME2 site were accurate, but we don't know which of them, if either, were referring to Mordin. My guess would be the Tuchunka one, since he's a scientist. :In short: We don't know where Mordin and Grunt are located/recruited, and the information we have suggests they both could be either on Tuchunka or Omega. :JakePT 04:37, December 13, 2009 (UTC) ::You're right and it all makes sense. I had no idea Blur did that. I like their work, and I had always taken the DA:O one as an interpretation as I guess there wasn't a whole lot of secret info with that lol. In the end you're right. I just gotta remember to wait and see and not let myself get carried away.--Xaero Dumort 05:31, December 13, 2009 (UTC) ::::Blur was also the studio behind Star Wars: The Old Republic's "Deceived" trailer. Love love love. --Tullis 13:51, December 13, 2009 (UTC) :::::Yeah, the SWTOR trailer was one of the most awesome things I've seen in my entire life! SpartHawg948 20:55, December 13, 2009 (UTC) Speculation Policy Just saw your post on that anon user's page about speculation, which you added just before my own. Thanks for that, but in the future can you please also direct people to the Style Guide, particularly the section on speculation? The rules for what is and isn't allowed are clearly laid out there, and it is always preferable to say "This is wrong, these are the reasons why, and here are the guidelines for you to refer to", as opposed to just saying "this is wrong, this is why". Thanks! SpartHawg948 08:35, December 18, 2009 (UTC) :Roger that. ;) :JakePT 09:41, December 18, 2009 (UTC) Language Please remember to mind the language with which you refer to other editors. TheWilsonator is hardly a "speculative SOB", and it would be appreciated if he (and other editors) not be referred to as such, as insulting other users is one of the grounds for banning. As for speculation, the bit in question was in compliance with the policy as it was referenced to the character reveal trailer, where the romance factor was heavily implied. If it had truly been pure speculation, wouldn't you or I have removed it sometime in the past three months, as it has been there since September and we have both made edits to the page? Regardless of all that, please just mind the language. Thanks, SpartHawg948 10:57, December 19, 2009 (UTC) :Sorry, the SOB remark was meant in jest, I didn't think it through. Also, as I am quite new I haven't been fully up to scratch on speculation policy for some time, so that sentence hasn't exactly been on my radar, hence why I didn't notice it as speculation until recently. JakePT 12:06, December 19, 2009 (UTC) Thanks Thanks for all the help combating the recent wave of vandalism. It's been an interesting day, but we're managing. :) I just wish there was a way to keep all the crazies from stumbling across us, but what're you gonna do? So, long story short, thanks again! SpartHawg948 11:51, December 20, 2009 (UTC) New Boxes Been watching what you are doing and overall I think it looks great. One small gripe, I'm not entirely that the VA should be in the character box. but then again I always thought that it should be in trivia and not the main article. Great work though, I love the color scheme.--Xaero Dumort 19:26, January 1, 2010 (UTC) :Please see my response at Template Talk:Character, and please (I'm going to reiterate even though I also say this in the response) don't jump to conclusions or make unfounded assumptions about me (or anyone), as it was completely inaccurate to say I don't give a damn about looks or design. I give my reasons in the response, but it boils down to priorities. I don't make unfounded assumptions about you, I'd ask the same courtesy in return. Thanks, SpartHawg948 21:34, January 1, 2010 (UTC) ::More input Template Talk:Character. Long and short... if it's your impression, don't say it's proven, Ally/Adversary/Squadmate Affiliation (or "Alliance") is not feasible, for reasons enumerated in response, and maybe we should wait till after ME2 releases to propose changes like this, since new proposals may become obsolete then anyways. SpartHawg948 04:37, January 2, 2010 (UTC) I am only going to say this once... DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES DELETE ANOTHER USERS COMMENTS FROM A USER TALK PAGE, AS YOU DID ON Talk:Purgatory. EVER. Deleting another users comments WILL get you blocked. It's one of the rules nearest and dearest to my heart. I generally give people the benefit of the doubt and warn them ONCE not to do it again. This is that warning. I don't know if you communicated with the other user about deleting their comments, but you deleted one of mine as well, and I certainly did not consent to it. Please do not mistake the tone of this post for anything other than what it truly is- me trying to get a point across and relay to you the seriousness of this. This is one rule I will not budge on. Thanks, SpartHawg948 19:50, January 2, 2010 (UTC) :Woah, Ok, that was completely accidental, I went back and looked at the difference between the page before and after my message and I can say with complete certainty that those two comments were not there when I posted. Maybe I was editing an old version and didn't notice (I didn't see a warning) or an accidental keyboard bump or two deleted a chuck of the text when I wasn't paying attention, I don't know, but it was an accident. Sorry, but this message was a complete surprise and I had no clue what on Earth you were on about until I went to the page and checked the history. I am well aware of that rule and would not violate it knowingly, :JakePT 04:20, January 3, 2010 (UTC) ::Which is why I said "Please do not mistake the tone of this post for anything other than what it truly is- me trying to get a point across and relay to you the seriousness of this." I didn't say that it was knowingly, just that it was a major and pretty obvious (either by looking at the page after your edit, or the page history at any time) incident, and as such, steps need to be taken to ensure that this doesn't happen ever. It would have been a quick fix to undo it, and again, it was a pretty obvious edit either by just looking at the page or looking at the history. However, consulting the history it is clear that the deleted comments were there before your edit, but not after, thus my comment, which for the third time was not personal, just a strongly worded warning to remind you (and the other people in the past I have warned in the exact same manner to take the extra few seconds necessary to ensure this stuff doesn't happen. SpartHawg948 05:20, January 3, 2010 (UTC) :::Ok, as I said, I didn't notice any comments disappearing so why would I check the history or undo my comment? I had no idea anything happened to the other comments. I must have accidentally highlighted the other comments before typing or edited an old version accessed from activity feed and either there was a bug or I missed a warning, but in posting what I did I had no indication I was deleting another's comments. I'm not saying they weren't there, I'm saying I didn't see them and I wasn't taking it personally or anything, I was just expressing my surprise at what I'd done and gave some reasons why it might have happened. JakePT 05:31, January 3, 2010 (UTC) ::::No worries. I don't know if you do this much or not, but I always (and frequently) check the recent changes log, and it really leapt out at me there, that big ol' red minus a couple thousand number. I shouldn't assume that everyone does that though, which would explain why you didn't notice it. SpartHawg948 07:40, January 3, 2010 (UTC) :::::Oh OK, yeah, I just check the Activity Feed. I didn't even know about the Recent Changes log (I just found it, useful). Had I been using it I probably would have noticed something was up.JakePT 07:44, January 3, 2010 (UTC) ::::::It is indeed very useful! I'd miss so much stuff if it weren't for recent changes. An admin's best friend, especially an absent-minded admin! SpartHawg948 07:46, January 3, 2010 (UTC) New boxes and character pages SH alerted me to your redesigns of the character pages and infoboxes. I'm honestly not in favour of the majority of your character page redesigns, but I do like the little tables for the characters' talents at the top complete with icons. They definitely look better left aligned (I originally thought they were centred, which wouldn't look very good) but those would be a nice addition. As a note about images on character pages: it's necessary to intersperse them throughout the dossier sections, rather than having them on the left, because it breaks up the text into much more accessible chunks. Think how newspapers handle photos on a page. I don't know if you saw my comment on infoboxes on my talk page, but I really think that the best way to go with character infoboxes is to strip them down to a name, and essentially turn them into a glorified frame. We don't have consistent information (say, eye colour, birth dates etc) for all characters; locations, ranks, affiliations and other data are only going to become more problematic as the series goes on, and as I said on my talk page, all the information is there in the initial paragraph. I really think a full strip-down is the best way to go to avoid problems in the future; I'm mainly thinking of characters like Tali, who are problematic enough as it is! : ) As a note, I do like the changes proposed to the planet / system etc, and I respect you want to make the wiki more pleasing, but it's tough having time to devote to it at the moment. I do want the wiki to look good, but we have Redemption coming out quite soon; our article count could easily double when ME2 comes out at the end of the month, so please forgive me if minor (and major) aesthetic changes don't seem to be prioritised. Your efforts are appreciated though. : ) Hit me up over email if you want to get a discussion going (as I'm not on the site as much at the moment). --Tullis 21:18, January 5, 2010 (UTC) :Thanks for the message. I want to send you an email but can't find your address anywhere? Is there something I'm missing? :I'll post what I was going to say here, and you can reply via email if you want (it's my wikia username at me dot com, not writing it out in full to avoid spam bots). :I'm curious what you mean by the majority if the redesigns? You mentioned the picture alignment, which I get (though don't necessarily agree with, but you're the boss), though I do want to enforce consistent widths, wherever they're aligned (because if I do that, even with left and right aligned images, it would only add one vertical line to my layout demonstration). What else is there? What do you think of the spoiler warnings/squadmember boxes etc.? :I understand your position on the info boxes, and am honestly not too hung up on content, it was mainly a layout/colour thing for me, though I would make one suggestion, that is that "just a name" would be kind of pointless, it would be better to go to just a frame (or nothing), or at least a name and a blurb, something like 'C-Sec Investigator' for Garrus, 'Krogan Mercenary' for Wrex, or even just their class. In fact their class is probably the best idea since it's something we have for all squadmates, and gives some insight into their character. People like Anderson and Udina would be pretty easy to make up 'classes' for, like 'Human Captain' or 'Human Ambassador'. :PS: On the System/Planet thing, those have zero content changes and is just an edit to the template, all it would take is me to copy the templates I've made into the existing ones and the changes will propagate throughout all the pages with no effort on anyone's part. So if you give the word, bam, done. :JakePT 03:52, January 6, 2010 (UTC) :I'm fiddiling around with one of the pages, and the left-right-left alignment thingy isn't having the effect you're saying it should. I agree that the text should be in manageable chunks but having the images done the way they are currently isn't doing that, it's just making the current large chunk bendy, shifting the left margin around, making it harder for the reader to keep track of where they are since when their eyes dart down and to the left expecting the beginning of the next line, they could find the middle of the line, since the last line they were reading was up against an image, but the next line had made the paragraph longer than the image, so that line was aligned significantly further to the left of the previous line. I have no idea if any of that made sense. An alternative would be to split the Dossier into sub sections, like 'Background', 'Hunting Saren', 'Personality' etc. and have each image appear aligned to the right (I'm a big proponent of aligning to the right because it doesn't affect the reader's ability to find the beginning of the next line) at the beginning of each page. :What I'll do is edit my Garrus page to see how that suggestion works out. It should be like that by the time you read this. :JakePT 04:08, January 6, 2010 (UTC) ::Just a quick note, go to Tullis' page, then in the little box beneath the "site index" thingy on the left side of the screen should be an option to "Email this user". If it's not showing up for you... well, I honestly don't know what to tell you... computers aren't really my specialty. :( SpartHawg948 04:31, January 6, 2010 (UTC) :::Nope, nothing. :S JakePT 05:06, January 6, 2010 (UTC) Hi, I saw you edit the ME1 OST page. There are more missing music from the OST: elevators, laboratories, the character creation, escape from the Citadel, various Wards, Citadel Tower, Refinery, etc. All of them can be listened to on Youtube. Do they belong to the missing section (perhaps with links)? Kd82 09:59, January 19, 2010 (UTC) You and Me We're on top of new game info like white on rice! lol--Xaero Dumort 18:30, January 19, 2010 (UTC) What happened to the choices-effects from ME1? Apparently; they said on the ME2 discussion page that you deleted the section about choices in ME1 that effect parts of ME2; things like the treatment of conrad, the rachni queen, etc. Might I ask why you removed it? With ME2 fastly approaching, it might be nice for people to know so they can make sure they choose the choice they'll want most for ME2 later on. :Can't totally speak for JakePT's reasoning here, but you have to realize the section was getting pretty long, some would say needlessly so. It's still noted that choices from ME (not ME1, just ME) carry over to ME2, and as you state, ME2 is fast approaching, which means that even if the info were still around, it would be rendered obsolete and deleted in 7 days anyways, same as all the pre-release stuff about the first game was deleted when it came out. SpartHawg948 23:00, January 19, 2010 (UTC) :Yeah, I deleted it because it was getting pretty long and apparently pretty much every choice carries over in some way, so it seemed a bit superfluous having a list. JakePT 01:17, January 20, 2010 (UTC) If it ain't broke, don't fix it? Question: What was wrong with the original image? :P Currently jacking into the png file you attempted to upload with Photoshop. Phylarion 14:47, January 21, 2010 (UTC) :The wiki has a no Shepard image policy. You could see Shepard. JakePT 14:48, January 21, 2010 (UTC) ::: Could you not have just cropped Shepard out of it in Paint or something? Phylarion 14:49, January 21, 2010 (UTC) :::: All I did was take a new screencap of a different frame where the gun was covering Shepard, nothing major. I've uploaded images taken using the same method before, I have no idea what's wrong the file or why it happened, there's nothing unusual about it. JakePT 14:51, January 21, 2010 (UTC) :: Obviously there is considering it's not working still. Phylarion 14:55, January 21, 2010 (UTC) :::: Update: I surmise it's the wiki's problem. Perhaps we've hit the bandwidth or the space limit finally? :P Phylarion 15:19, January 21, 2010 (UTC) ::::: Yeah, I was thinking along those lines. Tried to upload new image to existing image and my browser crashed, which I thought would explain it, but then reverting failed and uploading as a completely new image, and using a different file didn't help, so... yeah. JakePT 15:33, January 21, 2010 (UTC) Policy Forum I don't know whether or not you have noticed but there is currently a proposal to establish a new forum where policy for the ME Wiki can be debated and voted on. The forum would allow anyone to bring to a policy question to the attention of the community and we could use some input. Take a look at the proposal on the Forum:Policy Forum page. Thanks in advance. Lancer1289 02:41, July 12, 2010 (UTC)